The current legal climate in some parts of the world is so biased against men that as a man, you're a total fool if you enter a love relationship with a woman with an underage child.

Whenever the child feels unhappy with something you do, the blame falls on the fact that you are not the child's natural father, and an usurper of the child's mother. When the child is old enough to do so, it will probably scheme against you, and whenever her mother feels unhappy about you, she will side with the child.

If any problem in your relationship becomes public, expect no sympathy from the media, even when those who report about you are fellow men.

If any problem in your relationship comes to the attention of law enforcement agencies or the judiciary, it will likely even get worse. Because of the child's natural opposition against you, any testimony it will give will likely very much exaggerate anything "bad" you may have done, and there is a considerable likelihood that you will be framed for child abuse.

Now, while all of the above already is bad enough in the US, it's even worse in some Southeast Asian countries such as the Philippines. Because there, you have two aggravating factors: a local male population that views all foreign men who enter into sexual relationships with local women as unwelcome competitors, and a judiciary with much lower standards in establishing the guilt of an accused than in the US.

In the Philippines, foreign men have been sent to death row on framed charges of abusing a jealous live-in partner's daughter, and the filing of criminal charges against foreign men who do not behave in a way that pleases the Philippine female part of a relationship is a common scheme. The 'sexual opportunities' member section provides case reports and further details.

That much about male fools.

Now for wise men.

As long as the anti-male bias in the US media won't end, and as long as the anti-male bias in law enforcement and the judiciary is not corrected, follow a few simple principles.

As a wise man, don't enter commitment-based sexual relationships with women who have children. Sooner or later, the foul decision to do so will haunt you.

I think that in the US and many countries that follow the US model of anti-male bias, it is appropriate that women who are single parents live without a permanent male partner.

If ever you find yourself in a sexual relationship with a woman who has a child or children, keep the child or children away. By no means become a substitute father.

If you are a wise man in the US or another country with a similar anti-male bias, consider heterosexual relationships in other parts of the world. Many men in the US and countries that follow the US role model have only learned to accept feminist terms because otherwise, they would likely end up without a sexual outlet.

When a considerable number of men temporarily or permanently emigrate from the US for sexual reasons, this can have some interesting implications. If governments of countries that would be preferred destinations were to handle this rightly, the movement can channel substantial amounts of money to their citizens.

And no, local men in destination countries would not have to be losers. An increasing number of pro-sexual women realizes that the anti-heterosexual social and judicial climate in the US, as it is favored by feminazis and Christian fundamentalists, is not appropriate for them either, and they increasingly consider a more sexual lifestyle with local men abroad.

While there is a long tradition of US women traveling for better sex (to Hawaii in the 50s, or to destinations that provided "Latin" lovers), the potential exists for this to happen on a larger scale.

As men in the US who prefer a pro-sexual lifestyle are increasingly threatened by sexual harassment charges, false date rape charges, domestic violence charges, and more of that kind, they naturally develop heterophobia. And as US men either go abroad for heterosexual adventures or restrain themselves, US women who would welcome to be sexually approached, increasingly find it harder to be with men they find attractive.

Bali used to be a destination that was well suited for single females from Western countries, as the local men are charming and always willing to approach Western women while at the same time still being polite and not obnoxious. Bali also has always been a much safer destination for women than, for example, Jamaica or Tunisia.

However, the current (2005, 2006) Indonesian government has decided to choke tourism in favor of Islamic law and order, arresting especially foreigners with miniscule amounts of personal-use drugs and processing them for long prison terms.

Yes, I can imagine a future when sexual emigration from the US (of heterosexual men and heterosexual women) can become a trend that opposes the economic immigration to the US.

And Third World countries that could become destinations could make sure that such a trend substantially benefits them. Appropriate measures should include easy stay permits for those who pay a flat foreign visitor tax of a few hundred dollars per month.